Arrhythmias & electrophysiology
Key stakeholder views on atrial fibrillation screening: a systematic mixed-studies review and interpretive analysis
Authors' conclusion
Atrial fibrillation screening is acceptable however definitive evidence regarding need and harms is required.
Study context
- Population
- Key stakeholders regarding implementation of atrial fibrillation (AF) screening34 papers
- Outcome
- Stakeholder views on AF screening implementation
Methodological detailscritical interpretive synthesis
- Critical interpretive synthesis
Main finding
As reported in the abstract
- Value, benefits and risks: stakeholders cautiously optimistic, positive about health benefits; concerns over risks/harms (e.g. anticoagulation), worry for patients, increased burden for practice/healthcare system
- Models: systematic screening not supported by evidence; risk-based approaches suggested; handheld ECG perceived as quick and easy-to-use; concerns over direct-to-consumer devices
- Most common barriers in healthcare settings: time constraints, workflow impact, remuneration/reimbursement, data systems and data security problems
- Systemic barriers: need for evidence of benefit, clear guidelines and pathways, adequate remuneration/reimbursement, inter-agency collaboration, software, access and inclusivity
- Evidence gaps: systematic and population-wide screening programmes; views of system-level stakeholders/key decision-makers
- 16 qualitative; 8 surveys; 10 mixed-methods
Original publication
Key stakeholder views on atrial fibrillation screening: a systematic mixed-studies review and interpretive analysis. Europace. Published 14 March 2026. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →